Re: apr_reslist semantics

[William A. Rowe, Jr.]

Ruediger Pluem wrote:

On 05/12/2008 09:22 PM, Nick Kew wrote:

Of course we can't just hack apr_reslist willy-nilly.

But perhaps it's time to introduce an additional API, or even an environment variable, that will select

the "maximum idle lifetime of a resource" semantics
of TTL.

Or we create a new function similar to apr_reslist_timeout_set that sets
this value (I like the second proposal more).

Agreed, manipulate this independently, provided it can be toggled in real
time (as opposed to being locked into this behavior for the lifetime of
the apr_reslist).

Of course this would need to happen before the release of 1.3.0 if we want
to bring this into 1.3.x.

+1 provided a patch is forthcoming shortly.

Like Roy, I'm frustrated with aprutil's dependency madness, and I'm working
right now on abstracting out apu-util into a loadable module.  At this point
a --with-ldap build on linux FC8 is producing this pile of crap as bindings
for those applications with no use for ldap;

+libldap-2.3.so.0
+liblber-2.3.so.0
+libresolv.so.2
+libsasl2.so.2
+libssl.so.6
+libcrypto.so.6
+libgssapi_krb5.so.2
+libkrb5.so.3
+libcom_err.so.2
+libk5crypto.so.3
+libz.so.1
+libkrb5support.so.0
+libkeyutils.so.1
+libselinux.so.1

So if we take a few more days to smooth out the rough edges of 1.3.0 I think
it's a huge win to get these things right, reslist included.

Bill